Tom Stoppard biography

On reading Tom Stoppard’s life

  • -Why are there so few rightwing playwrights?

  • -Good playwrights seem to see a lot of theatre

  • -I don’t want fame

  • -Theatremakers as not-writers



I never want to be so famous that someone will want to write a biography of me. Even a friendly biography must cover some light warts even if not deep scars. I


In my early years, I never read much biography or even non-fiction. Poems, plays, novels, graphic novels even. The world of imagination seemed the most exciting.


As I age, I read more non-fiction. Real life is some times more incredible than fiction. Where ideas come from has been of increasing interest to me as well as what the ideas or stories are themselves.


Tom Stoppard has been described by David Hare as “conservative with a small c” although I can see his politics are complex and don’t easily fit on a left-right scale.


Still this makes Stoppard one of the only 5% or maybe 10% of playwrights who could be viewed more right of centre - with particularly emphasis on freedoms and freedoms of speech.


I find this notable on many counts but first:


Why are so few playwrights right wing? If you take the recent UK and US elections or more broadly you had for example a 69 / 66 million split in favour of Biden over Trump that’s almost 50/50 whereas playwrights would by 95/5 I am guessing. Is this more pronounced in theatre writers over even other creative arts? I’m unsure.


But, then how interesting to have such a well regarded playwright be “small c conservative” - are there ideas we should confront ourselves with in particular, as Stoppard writes in theatre from such a theatrically under-represented tribe?  These are not the extreme views of an Ezra Pound but a rightish-centre.


Secondly - the importance of letter writing within all this - both as a record of what was happening and as an important medium of the time - the 1950s,1960s - perhaps emails have replaced that now but there is an element that we seem to miss from those letter writing days. I would not swap it back and lose emails but there is a piece of slow thinking we would find helpful.


Stoppard seemed so fully immersed in theatre and arts - via journalism and meeting and conversation - in the 1950s and 1960s and of course beyond.


Theatre was particular exciting creative art of that time. The biographer Hermione Lee conjures up the theatre and artistic discourse of the time and extracts strangely intriguing patterns and details

Pinter was a figure of great interest to Stoppard, long before they became friends and fellow playwrights. He would never forget their first encounter, in January 1962. When, just over fifty years later, Stoppard was awarded the PEN Pinter Prize, he began his acceptance speech with that memory. Pinter came to Bristol to see a student production of The Birthday Party for the Sunday Times Drama Festival. Stoppard found himself sitting behind him.

Thereupon I became distracted by the necessity of speaking to him. I needed an opening gambit, and started to consider several. So, when The Birthday Party – to which I gave as much of my attention as I could spare – was over, I tapped him on the shoulder, and – I’m sorry to say – spoke to him as follows: ‘Are you Harold Pinter or do you only look like him?’ He turned round and I got an early inkling of Harold Pinter’s unflinching, unswerving gaze. He said, ‘What?’ [This word performed by Stoppard in a low, sinister, threatening tone.] I don’t remember any more. Perhaps I fainted.

The next day, Pinter spoke to the drama students, and Stoppard was there with his notebook. His report (‘The Tense Present’), though unsigned, was unmistakeably his work. He described Pinter’s talk as ‘an erratic staccato of grudging self-exposure’. It had ended with an unidentified quotation: The fact would seem to be, if in my position one may speak of facts, not only that I shall have to speak of things of which I cannot speak, but also, which is even more interesting, but also that I, which is if possible even more interesting, that I shall have to – I forget, no matter. Stoppard recognised this from Beckett’s novel The Unnamable, and finished the quotation in a footnote: ‘And at the same time I am obliged to speak. I shall never be silent. Never.’

So this piece in the Western Daily Press of 8 January 1962 is the first publication in which Beckett, Pinter and Stoppard are on the same page – all speaking, in their different ways, about the relationship between speech and silence. [My emphasis]

He noted that the student questions which followed Pinter’s talk ‘suggested respect, reverence, suspicion, antagonism and scant understanding. Mr Pinter remained polite.’ And he gave extracts from what Pinter had said, prefacing them with the phrase ‘Harold Pinter, he say:’ – as if listening to an oracle. These were some of the oracle’s words, as reported by an otherwise silent and anonymous Stoppard:

I’m going to make categorical statements which should not be taken as categorical.

If I were to state a moral precept, it would be: Beware of the writer who declares that his heart is in the right place and has it in full view. This is a body lost in an empty prison of cliché.

My characters tell me so much and no more.

Between my [knowledge] and what they say there lies a territory which is compulsory to explore … Not that I regard my characters as anarchic, out of control. I do the donkey work. The shaping is me.

[I do not agree] with the tendency to seek allegories in my plays.

There are two silences: one is where no word is spoken, and another where there is a torrent of words. The speech we hear is an indication of the speech we don’t hear … an anguished smokescreen, a constant stratagem to cover nakedness … What takes place in the silences is an evasion, a desperate rearguard action to keep ourselves to ourselves.

Of all these Pinter-statements, the one that stayed longest in his mind was: ‘Writing for me is a completely private activity … What I write is not obligated to anything other than to itself.’

He quoted it, half a century on, as a demonstration of the quality he most identified with Pinter: honesty.

How immersed in creative discourse are our greatest writers? It seems to me a great many of our playwrights are extremely immersed.


From Stoppard to Hare to Bennett to Pinter to Churchill to Ravenhill- I hear the stories of them going to, involving in and absorbing from the theatre. Even those who never go on the public record such as Caryl Churchill (who is one of the very few British writers who could possibly argue for more greatness than Stoppard in theatre) are seen  heavily engaged.


Certain novelist seem to be able to be more recluse but it seems to me that theatre writers are in a constant conversation to form their work.


Tom Stoppard was very seriously involved in the craft of plays. He reviewed over 130 in a year in the early 1960s. He went over Godot line by line for a failed film adaptation. He wrote a lot. Saw a lot. And was friends with remarkable other artists ranging from O’toole in his early life (early 20s) to Pinter. He had a strong agent from early on (Kenneth Ewing).


He travelled fairly widely. I’m only in his early life but his immersion in the world of theatre and creative arts seemed very deep. That does bring me to advice I hear for young writers who want to be brilliant but who don’t see much theatre. It seems to me that within theatre at least - active involvement seems to be a helpful and maybe necessary step on a path to brilliance. 


I think it’s noteworthy to dwell on what type of theatre maker Tom Stoppard is not. Stoppard is in “the playwright as the centre of the theatrework” tradition. There is a counter tradition from ensemble work or theatremaker not-as-playwright.


To me this was a running debate in the 2000s between David Eldridge and Chris Goode, in a series of blog conversations. It also influences my work today as I’ve produced work which arguably might fit in both traditions at times.


I won’t recount the debate here but there was a recent podcast* where Eldridge and Goode reconcile and reminisce on their respective views.

Coda one, while having a long running intense disagreements, I’m fairly neither would be considered rightwing theatre makers.

Coda two, biography Hermione Lee is in her own right an admired and accomplished biographer.

Links:

Blog on Goode + Eldridge

Amazon link to Hermione Lee’s biography on Stoppard


ThenDoBetter Grant winner: Lorenzo Evans

Lorenzo has won a grant award for:

“Learning physics and mathematics in public, while fostering a community for like minded enthusiasts”

Lorenzo writes:

“….If you were to ask most people who are extremely enthusiastic about Mathematics and Physics, they would tell you that it has always been this way. In my case, it was the other way around- I avoided Maths as much as possible and thus never really looked at Physics as anything but "the science I think is cool, but can't do, because I don't like math". 


So how did I get into these fields? By chance, via programming, and since then, an entire world has opened up, that I'm excited to continue exploring, and hope to entice more people to do this exploring with me!


One of the main methods I'm using to do so are social media, having started a twitter account for like-minded enthusiasts, through which I will be broadcasting Interintellect event links, and posting coworking links for people who want to see what the real work of learning Mathematics and Physics looks like (spoiler alert, it involves much paper and many pens).

What I'm doing so far is rather sprawling, currently I'm hosting public events via the Interintellect, through an internal community, called The Olympia Academy, currently doing a three part series on Quantum Computing,  which is happening in tandem with QubitByQubit's Quantum Computing course, and I will be chronicling my learning in a set of public facing notes.

My Twitter: https://twitter.com/0xLEDev

Salons: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/quantum-computing-1-history-plank-turings-brainchild-ii-salon-tickets-136265747519#

Also:

What is something you understand, but think few people appreciate?

What I think I understand, that few people appreciate, is the sheer vastness of technological and scientific advancement lost to our civilization, because of the disenfranchisement of potential scientists, via the dilapidation of social (and scientific, in some cases) systems. I say this as someone who went from vehemently hating mathematics, none of those words chosen lightly, to being in love with it. Mathematics has not changed, and thus it must be me, and particularly, it was my perspective on these things, that changed: from the one I was given, to the one I was both given and instrumental in fashioning for myself. I think I am trying to prevent society from suffering from the full brunt of the loss it has set upon itself. I am aware, that others are well aware of it, but I have lived it. Quite frankly, with regards to the ability of society to direct minds to work they're suited for, it failed me greatly: I should have been a physicist.

More information on the microgrants here.

When will the UK reach herd immunity? Likely by June 2021 if not before.

  • When will the UK reach herd immunity?

  • Possible best case, April 2021

  • Likely moderate case, June 2021

  • When will US reach herd immunity? Possible July 2021.

After puzzling over why the speed of vaccination rates are seemingly lower than New York in 1947, I thought I’d look at when the UK could hit herd immunity*. I could not find any models or estimates in a google search - which I found surprising. Why has no one put an estimate out there that we could consider? Could anyone point metoone? In the spirit of thinking if you can do better, then do better, I thought I’d put a simplifying model out. My assumptions are definitely wrong but give you a sense of where we might end up.

Assumptions, useful information and data used:

  • 70% of population need antibodies/protection to achieve herd immunity 

  • 17% of cases are asymptomatic / not tested

  • Antibodies give protection for at least 12 months, reinfection is unlikely (<5% chance)

  • 3.2m UK COVID cases reported (as of 14/15 Jan)

  • 2.7m vaccinations (as of 14/15 Jan)

  • 33m in the UK are groups that would make 99% of deaths

  • First dose gives protection

  • Assumes no supply issues

  • Current run rate = 274,000 vaccines a day (13 Jan)

UK Government targets:

  • "Spring" for Priority Groups (33m target)

  • 14m target by 15 Feb

Assuming the UK keeps up the current run rate of c. 274,000 vaccines a day, we should broadly achieve immunity by early June 2021 (assumptions below). By mid April all 33m high priority populations could be vaccinated under this run rate - so a March target is viable.  Reaching another 11m by 15 Feb (to hit 14m target), which would need 366K vaccinations a day for 30 days looks like a stretch but the UK might not miss it by far.

Screenshot 2021-01-15 at 16.32.39.png

Assuming the UK continues to speed up vaccinations and hits 500,000 a day by the month April then herd immunity could come as early as April. Model below. This is a moderate overestimate as infection rates will come down.

Optomistic Model of UK Herd Immunity

Optomistic Model of UK Herd Immunity

Either way COVID deaths should start to fall dramatically by March, and quite possibly much early, say by early Feb if the govt can roll out these vaccines.

A faster roll out will save more lives, and normlacy comes quicker, but the UK should be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

Let me know major assumption mistakes or anyone else has a model out there.


Updated for a US model. This is via Youyan Gu, his site and assumptions link here. This puts the US on track for July 2021 herd immunity which looks plausible to me and aligns with my very approx. calculations, though US have to continue to improve its vaccine roll out.

US-herd-immunity.jpeg

Links:

* Herd Immunity = When most of a population is immune to an infectious disease, this provides indirect protection—or herd immunity (also called herd protection)—to those who are not immune to the disease.


For example, if 80% of a population is immune to a virus, four out of every five people who encounter someone with the disease won’t get sick (and won’t spread the disease any further). In this way, the spread of infectious diseases is kept under control. Depending how contagious an infection is, usually 50% to 90% of a population needs immunity to achieve herd immunity.

Asymptomatic Assumptions =17% https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3


% Herd immunity assumptions = 70% https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/herd-immunity-and-coronavirus/art-20486808


Reported Data as of Jan 2021 https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#coronavirus-country-profiles

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/


Priority Group Assessment and vaccine plan https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/951928/uk-covid-19-vaccines-delivery-plan-final.pdf

Far Flung Civilisations

I’ve been thinking about far flung civilisations this week. Scientists think they may have detected phosphine in Venus that would be a potential sign of life. (NYT article)

Archaeologists and anthropologists have made a strong argument that humans were in the North Americas much earlier - 26,500 years ago - than previously though. Suggests humans could have done long distance travel from earlier than thought. (Smithosonian article covering the Nature paper)... "... For most of the 20th century archaeologists generally agreed that humans who had crossed the Beringia land bridge from Siberia to North America only ventured further into the continent when retreating ice sheets opened a migration corridor, about 13,000 years ago. But a few decades ago, researchers began discovering sites across the Americas that were older, pushing back the first Americans’ arrival by a few thousand years. Now, the authors of a new study at Mexico’s Chiquihuite cave suggest that human history in the Americas may be twice that long...."

 

I’m still influenced today by my few days visiting the extremely remote Wana tribe in the Indonesian jungle.
From the archive..."  Once upon a time I went to visit one of the most remote people on this planet. These people were called the Wana tribe. “ Blog here:

public.jpeg

UK Arts funding, voucher scheme?

The UK arts has its rescue package although details of how it will be funded are still being worked out.  But notes that I have (much communicated via ACE, Arts Council England) are:

  • Indicative timetable; guidance published  end of July/early August, application period August, decisions from early October (very much still tbc) 

  • likely that loans would have a commercial sector focus, grants (some administered via ACE) a not for profit focus  – although not fixed.

  • likely that money will be for survival and support cash flow, not making work

  • money is for current  financial year (ACE’s own grant not confirmed beyond April 2021, a comprehensive spending review in autumn ’20)

  • recovery fund is being administrated by ACE on behalf of DCMS and will reflect Government priorities

  • there will not be enough to rescue everyone and costs savings will still need to be made. 

There’s no real mechanism for supporting freelancers here as I can see yet.

On this note, one populist package that could be enacted has been outlined by Tyler Cowen. This essentially is an arts voucher programme given to everyone to spend on the arts - that way the public can choose what to spend their money on - and it is not decided by any one institution or body.

I think this could work if a wide definition of arts were to be used and could also be popular.

Do follow the ACE twitter feed to be up to date.

Government Arts Funding scheme press release link:”…

  • £1.15 billion support pot for cultural organisations in England delivered through a mix of grants and loans. This will be made up of £270 million of repayable finance and £880 million grants.

  • £100 million of targeted support for the national cultural institutions in England and the English Heritage Trust.

  • £120 million capital investment to restart construction on cultural infrastructure and for heritage construction projects in England which was paused due to the coronavirus pandemic.

  • The new funding will also mean an extra £188 million for the devolved administrations in Northern Ireland (£33 million), Scotland (£97 million) and Wales (£59 million).

Decisions on awards will be made working alongside expert independent figures from the sector including the Arts Council England and other specialist bodies such as Historic England, National Lottery Heritage Fund and the British Film Institute….”

And here are some details via Cowen on his idea after Peacock:

…Out of the 1.4bn, would the Treasury consider some funding (or indeed extra) for an Arts Voucher scheme? I think the funding proposed may work at the institutional level but still misses something

[Albeit Cowen  directs his thoughts at the US, it's still applicable in the UK. The core idea would be:]

"...The second element of the arts rescue plan would take a different tack. Rather than giving money to arts institutions, the federal government could set aside some amount for a concept known as arts vouchers, originally developed by the British economist Alan Peacock.

Arts vouchers are similar to education vouchers except that they cover the arts. The government would hand them out to each [American] British citizen.... .... Unlike direct grants to arts institutions, arts vouchers give consumers a big say in where aid goes. They could be more popular with voters, because they give each one a direct benefit — namely, cash in pocket (yes, they would have to spend it on the arts, but it’s still cash). (My emphasis)

Most of all, vouchers would recognize that planning authorities, even at state and local levels, don’t always know which artistic forms will be popular. If some reallocations are inevitable — for instance out of nightclubs and into outdoor bluegrass festivals — vouchers will allow those preferences to be registered quickly.

Obviously, if state and local governments specify a narrow set of eligible recipients, arts vouchers aren’t much different than direct grants. In that case, little is lost. Still, one hopes that vouchers can be used more imaginatively. ...

In short, vouchers can allow [American] artistic innovation to proceed, even flourish, rather than merely preserving everything as it was before the pandemic. Vouchers also serve an important macroeconomic function by maintaining consumer spending and demand, thus addressing one problem area of the broader economy. With direct grants to arts institutions, there is always the danger the funds simply will sit in the coffers of still-closed non-profits while the broader economy remains weak.

..."

On-line communities, light + dark

As I’ve mentioned I’m involved with several communities which live much of their life on-line. Like many human tools they can be used creatively or destructively.

The one Anoushka set up Transport Sparks for young people with transport special interests could not easily have happened in a world Pre-Facebook. It’s brought a lot of community and social value together. We may laugh or be cynical about Zuck’s assertions about the power of connections and Facebook’s mission, but I observe truth to that.

This long form William Davies (Guardian, H/T Anna Gat) looks at the dark side of WhatsApp groups. Where Transport Sparks brings together light. Davies highlights how private groups can breed hate and conspiracy.

One aspect of some successful communities is while there may be a strong on-line component and in fact the group might not survive without a sustaining online platform there is also a real world meet-up component or at least - in COVID times - a video meet up. The group doesn’t remain solely hidden and anonymous, it acts as a catalyst for real world meetups. My own Mingle was a little like that as well.

Anna Gat’s Interintellect has salons as a pivotal focus. Transport Sparks have transport meet ups. Climate Action Tech has meet-ups real world and now online as well. British American Project thrives on its conference.

That said some gaming communities are almost all on-line. The MiiVerse community was a wonderful community. Sadly, there was little money in it - only social value and it was decommissioned by Nintendo. 

On balance, I remain positive on humans. From this flows, I feel on balance positive about social media, platforms and communities and I feel positive about free speech and sharing ideas - even bad ones (thoughtful articulation of this importance by recent Paul Graham essay on conformity here) - as I think on balance we can add up to a better world despite all the challenges. Perhaps that’s one theme you can find from Thinking Bigly too.